↓ Skip to main content

Emissões otoacústicas em recém-nascidos com hipóxia perinatal leve e moderada

Overview of attention for article published in CoDAS, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Emissões otoacústicas em recém-nascidos com hipóxia perinatal leve e moderada
Published in
CoDAS, April 2016
DOI 10.1590/2317-1782/20162015086
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juliana Neves Leite, Vinicius Souza Silva, Byanka Cagnacci Buzo

Abstract

Introduction Severe neonatal hypoxia (as evidenced by the Apgar value) is currently considered the only risk for hearing loss. Hypoxia is one of the most common causes of injury and cell death. The deprivation of oxygen in mild or moderate cases of hypoxia, although smaller, occurs and could cause damage to the auditory system. Objective To investigate the amplitude of otoacoustic emissions in neonates at term with mild to moderate hypoxia and no risk for hearing loss. Methods We evaluated 37 newborns, divided into two groups: a control group of 25 newborns without hypoxia and a study group of 12 newborns with mild to moderate hypoxia. TEOAE and DPOAE were investigated in both groups. Results The differences between groups were statistically significant in the amplitude of DPOAE at the frequencies of 1000, 2800, 4000 and 6000 Hz. In TEOAE, statistically significant differences were found in all tested frequency bands. OAE of the study group were lower than those in the control group. Conclusion Although the occurrence of mild and moderate neonatal hypoxia is not considered a risk factor for hearing loss, deprivation of minimum oxygen during neonatal hypoxia seems to interfere in the functioning of the outer hair cells and, consequently, alter the response level of otoacoustic emissions. Thus, hese children need longitudinal follow-up in order to identify the possible impact of these results on language acquisition and future academic performance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 28%
Student > Postgraduate 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Professor 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 48%
Engineering 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 May 2016.
All research outputs
#23,319,379
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from CoDAS
#3
of 5 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,570
of 316,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from CoDAS
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.3. This one scored the same or higher as 2 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,105 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.